THE CAPITOL 
REMOVAL BILL 


ARGUMENT OF 
ROBERT C. ALSTON 

BEFORE 

LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE 
JUNE 8, 1919 










Mr. Chairman, and Gentlemen of the Committee: 

ISSUE IS ALREADY SETTLED. 

The excuse which Macon claims for presenting this issue 
is that the question of the location of the Capitol be set¬ 
tled. This issue has been settled as completely as it would 
be if a new vote of the people were taken. If what has 
been done does not settle it, the submission of it again 
to the people would not settle it. 

On the first Wednesday in December, 1877, the people of 
Georgia voted on this question, and out of the total vote of 
154,348, Atlanta received a majority of 43,946 votes. 
Eighty-two counties voted for her, nineteen of which were 
South of Macon. 

After the Capitol had been in the City of Atlanta for 
about forty-three years, and the City had become accus¬ 
tomed to it in its daily life, Macon raised the issue and 
submitted it to the Legislators of the State, who are the 
representatives of the people, and, after great advertising, 
they received less than the vote required to pass an ordi¬ 
nary bill in the House of Representatives; with the result 
that her effort to move was adjudicated against her. It 
was as complete a settlement of the issue as though it had 
been submitted to the people and the people had rejected 
it, for the law has made a method for settling the ques¬ 
tion, the first process of which is that it should receive, in 
the two Houses of the Legislature, the vote of two-thirds 
of the members elected to each of those Houses. So the 
question is as settled by that which has been done as it 
would be settled by what it is proposed to do. The ques¬ 
tion has been before this State long enough. It was first 
brought up in 1911. The adjudication against it is too com¬ 
plete. The reason for this continued agitation lies some¬ 
where else. 


2 


THE LOCATION IN ATLANTA IS AS PERMANENT AS 
THE DONATION. 

In 1877, when this question was before the Constitutional 
Convention, the City of Atlanta made an offer to the State, 
on July 19th, which was the eighth day of the Convention. 
It is as follows: 

“If Atlanta is selected by the Convention as the 
permanent Capital of this State, and if such selection 
is submitted and the same is ratified by the people, 
the City of Atlanta will convey to the State of Geor¬ 
gia any ten acres of land in or near the City of At¬ 
lanta now unoccupied, or the square in the heart of 
said City known as the City Hall lot, containing five 
(5) acres of land, and bounded by a street on every 
side, on which to locate and build a Capitol for the 
State. 

The City of Atlanta will build for the State of Geor¬ 
gia, on the location selected, a Capitol building as good 
as the old Capitol building in Milledgeville.” 

(See Small’s Debates, p. 52.) 

You will note that the proposition was that the City of 
Atlanta was to be selected as the permanent Capital. 

During the campaign this offer was renewed by the City 
Council. 

After the election in December, 1877, the Legislature of 
the State adopted a resolution in 1879, accepting Atlanta’s 
proposition, and it was then resolved: 

“That the State of Georgia does hereby accept from 
the said Mayor and Council, the said City Hall Lot and 
the said Mayor and Council are hereby authorized and 
required to convey the same to the State of Georgia 

in accordance with their proposal.” 

It was also resolved that the State would accept from 
the City of Atlanta a money payment in lieu of Atlanta’s 


3 


offer to erect a building as good as the old Capitol at Mil- 
ledgeville. Atlanta paid to the State the sum fixed by it 
on this account. Thereupon, and on the first day of Novem¬ 
ber, 1880, the City of Atlanta conveyed to the State of 
Georgia, “In accordance with their proposal”, the property 
on which the Capitol building is now situated, and the same 
was conveyed “in accordance with said tender and accep¬ 
tance”. 

It is contended that the Capitol is not permanently lo¬ 
cated in Atlanta, and it is proposed by the bill which is 
now before you to sell the Capitol building and the Gover¬ 
nor's Mansion and the ground upon which each is situated, 
and to take the proceeds thereof and erect another Capitol 
and another Governor’s Mansion in the City of Macon. 

I put it to you that, whether the Capitol was or was not 
permanently located in Atlanta, the location was as perma¬ 
nent as the gift, and the gift as permanent as the location. 
As to this there ought to be no dissent. Atlanta made the 
donation, which was accepted by the State, because the 
Capitol was permanently located in its borders; and, waiv¬ 
ing all technical questions, you cannot, in any degree of 
fairness, declare that the location was not permanent but 
that the donation was. 

Many Legislative matters are, in their final analysis, 
judged by the human conscience. I submit it to any man 
of conscience that this bill, as drawn, violates the funda¬ 
mental dictates of righteousness, for it proposes to take to 
Macon that which Atlanta conveyed, on condition that the 
location of the Capitol be permanent. 

This is no contention that the State has so contracted 
that it cannot remove the Capitol; but it is an assertion 
That, if the Capitol is not permanent, the donation is not; 
the permanency of the location was the consideration for 
the conveyance. 


4 


SHALL GEORGIA OR ALABAMA HAVE THE GREAT¬ 
EST CITY IN THE SOUTHEAST. 

The next year is the census year. The issue is going to 
be whether Georgia or Alabama shall have the chief city 
of the Southeast. Birmingham, with its marvelous con¬ 
gregation of mineral resources, grows by leaps and bounds, 
and challenges the supremacy of this State as to which shall 
lead. Alabama is united in putting her forward. To whom 
does the State of Georgia look in this competitive contest? 
Macon, by the last census, had less than one-fourth of the 
population of Birmingham; Atlanta was scarcely 20,000 
ahead of her. It is impossible for Macon to serve the State 
in that competition. 

REMOVAL OF CAPITOL WILL INJURE THE STATE. 

It is known from one end of the land to the other as 
the Capital City of Georgia. If it is removed, some reason 
for its removal must be assigned to the world. What can 
that reason be? Its location is healthful; the City is pros¬ 
perous; its people are contented; the City is performing 
its duty to the State and to the Nation; it is the center 
"of the railroad crossings between the Northeast and South¬ 
west, the Northwest and Southeast; it is the leading City 
in the Southeast. No reason can be assigned for the re¬ 
moval of the Capitol which would not likewise be a reason 
for detracting from it as a commercial center. No good 
reason can be assigned for the removal of the Capitol which 
is not likewise an argument for removing every headquar¬ 
ters organization within its borders; and to remove them 
from Atlanta is to remove them from the State of Georgia. 
It is impossible that those who have the welfare of Georgia 
at heart will, upon final test, injure this City, for, in strik¬ 
ing her, he strikes the State. 


5 


THE PROPOSED ACTION OFFENDS THE CONSTITU¬ 
TION. 

I submit to you that you cannot adopt this bill without 
yourselves setting aside the Constitution of the State of 
Georgia. It is provided by the Constitution (Code Section 
6570) as follows: 

“The proceeds of the sale of (certain railroads) * 
* * * * any other property owned by the State, 

whenever the General Assembly may authorize the sale 
of the whole or any part thereof, shall be applied to 
the payment of the bonded debt of the State, and shall 
not be used for any other purpose whatsoever, so long 
as the State has any existing bonded debt.” 

That Article of the Constitution is headed as follows: 

“PUBLIC PROPERTY PLEDGED FOR STATE DEBT.” 

It is held by the Supreme Court of this State that even 
a temporary application of the proceeds of public property 
to uses other than the payment of the bonded debt of the 
State, is illegal (113 Ga. 647). The answer made to this 
is that it is a Constitutional provision and can be changed 
by a Constitutional amendment. I believe no more fal¬ 
lacious argument could be presented. It is just as though 
I had made a note to you, with the condition that the pro¬ 
ceeds of the sale of any of my property shall be used to pay 
the same, and afterwards I sold my property without your 
consent, and did not pay your debt. Is there anyone who 
would defend me against this faithlessness? 

Georgia cannot act alone in such a matter, she must con¬ 
sult those who own her debt which is protected by her own 
guarantees. The State of Georgia can no more by her act 
relieve herself of this bargain than I can relieve myself of 
the obligation to which I have referred. This provision 
was put into the Constitution not only for the purpose of 
making security to the people who hold the State’s in- 


6 


debtedness, but as well to make it sure that the State 
would not be extravagant in its expenditures, and that the 
people of this State should be free from an indebtedness 
long existing, to the end that her resources might be at 
hand for supreme crises. 

What are those crises? The Constitution itself fixes 
them. 


“No debt shall be contracted by or on behalf of the 
State except ****** to repel invasion, to 
suppress insurrection, and to defend the State in time 
of war, or to pay the existing public debt.” 

I believe there are no more solemn words in any instru¬ 
ment than those to be found in this Section of our Consti¬ 
tution—“To repel invasion; to suppress insurrection; to 
defend the State in time of war”. That those times were 
likely to come in a State’s life were known to the men who 
wrote that law, because we were then just on the edges of 
the Reconstruction; the marks of an invading army were 
everywhere; the people were already impoverished because 
of it; and they knew that these events come in recurrence 
in the life of a State. 

Who can know that we are not now at one of these crises? 
The world is in turmoil; the relations of all life are being 
changed; the nation is entering into internationalism; a 
large part of our population has been under arms; a war 
threatens our borders; new ideas of life have come. Is 
there a feeling of safety that there will be no such crisis 
as is mentioned by our Constitution ? Is any man who hears 
me prepared to set aside those words of the men who were 
schooled in the Civil War and the Reconstruction period, 
and say that they are no longer needed ? Those are the only 
things for which the debt of the State may be increased. 
Yet it is utterly impossible to carry out the project of this 
bill without greatly increasing the indebtedness of the 
State. 


7 


It is utterly impossible to tear down this Capitol and re¬ 
locate it somewhere else out of the funds which will be 
realized from the sale of the present Capitol building and 
the grounds, and the Governor’s Mansion. It is perfectly 
well known that the cost of all building matters has in¬ 
creased almost beyond estimation, and that what cost, 
thirty-nine years ago, one million dollars, would cost three 
to five million now. The authors of this bill are mindful 
of this fact, and have made covert provision for it in that 
the General Assembly of the State is required, in the event 
the Capitol is removed to make provision by law for the 
removal of the Capitol of the State from the City of Atlanta 
to the City of Macon, and for the necessary buildings and 
quarters for the carrying on of the business and govern¬ 
ment of the State. 

Those provisions will empower the State to levy upon the 
people of Georgia increasing taxes to meet the artificial con¬ 
dition created by this unnecessary expenditure of the State’s 
money, and upsetting of its affairs. 

The proposal to finance this removal plan involves the 
following things: 

(A) Selling the property which Atlanta gave the State 
on the condition that the Capitol should be permanently 
located here; and, notwithstanding the destruction of the 
permanency of the location of the Capitol, to take the pro¬ 
ceeds of that property and plant them in the City of Macon. 

(B) The raising of a million of dollars in bonds by the 
County of Bibb, which have not yet been voted. 

(C) The conveyance by the City of Macon of Tattnall 
Square or other property equally suitable. 

(D) The raising of a large additional amount by taxa¬ 
tion of the people. 

These things break faith, first with Atlanta, who gave 
the Capitol site and money equal to the value of the Mil- 


8 


ledgeville Capitol for the purpose of having the Capitol per¬ 
manently located in Atlanta. It then proposes to break 
faith with the holders of the bonds of the State, to whom 
it has been represented in the Constitution that the pro¬ 
ceeds of the sale of the State’s property will be used only 
for the payment of the State’s indebtedness. The propo¬ 
sition then imposes an untold amount of taxes on the peo¬ 
ple, for a wholly unnecessary object. 

I submit to you that nothing but a great crisis would 
justify these things. You know, and I know that there is 
no such crisis. On the other hand, we all know that this 
menaces the State’s credit and the State’s property, which 
may yet be called to meet some of the crises anticipated by 
the Constitution. 

The Capitol building is a specialty. It cannot be sold for 
anything like its cost, for, if the Capitol is removed, the 
use for which the building was created will have ceased. 
The value thereof will be destroyed without benefiting a 
single person in all the world, and without uplifting any¬ 
thing or anybody, but the act will stand as a destruction 
of the State’s property to no purpose whatsoever. 

This is likewise true of the Governor’s Mansion and the 
land on which it is located, for, if you shock the business 
world by removing the Capitol, it immediately reduces the 
value of the land itself. 

THE STATE NEEDS ITS RESOURCES FOR NECESSARY 
PURPOSES. 

Is the State of Georgia in any condition to withstand 
this financial loss, and the increased taxes? 

For 1918 this State has a deficit of about $400,000.00. 
The appropriations for the current year exceed the income 
by more than $500,000.00. Should the tax digest of this 
year show an increased value of $85,000,000.00, the deficit 


9 


will still be $425,000.00. And, notwithstanding this de¬ 
ficit, the public schools of this State are properly demand¬ 
ing more and more of money. The budget which is pro¬ 
posed carries with it one-half million dollars more for these 
schools, and its advocates contend for another half million 
dollars; but it i£ conceded that they will receive a half mil¬ 
lion dollars more, so that the deficit which stares this State 
in the face for 1920 is not $425,000.00, but it is practically 
a million dollars; and, when you have gotten four millions 
of dollars given for the State schools, there will still be 
need for more money for those schools, for who, in all 
Georgia, is satisfied with their condition ? Who thinks that 
the 8,500 school houses in this State are not, for the most 
part, eye-sores and evidences of our parsimony ? Who feels 
that a child educated in the average school house in Georgia 
is equipped to meet the average demands of the world? 
Who is contented with the salaries paid to the more than 
15,000 school teachers throughout the State? Who is con¬ 
tented with its average school year of 130 days, such as 
exists now? And this average takes into consideration the 
maximum school year of nine months to be found in the 
cities, and shows you how extremely short is the minimum 
school year to be found in the country. Who does not know 
that this inequality of educational privileges is the chief 
thing which is stripping the country and over-crowding the 
cities? What man of intelligence dare increase that con¬ 
dition. 

This State makes appropriation for the people who are 
insane. Everybody knows that the cost of living has multi¬ 
plied many times. There are over four thousand patients 
under daily treatment in the State Institution, and yet we 
read from the report of the Superintendent that, because 
of the over-crowded condition, there is not room to accom¬ 
modate all who have made application, and many have been 
turned away. In the 1916 report of that same officer, we 
read that one small room, meant to accommodate one female 
patient, is made to suffice for two and sometimes three. 


10 


There were then 303 more white female patients than the 
normal capacity of the building provided for them. There 
were then 675 patients in that Institution in excess of the 
provision made for them. That condition has been some¬ 
what relieved since then as to negroes, but not as to white 
people. There are no means of separating the criminal in¬ 
sane from the patients who are not criminals. The insane 
murderer is put side by side with the patient who has done 
no harm and committed no crime. Who approves of that? 
Who would continue that condition? 

We have 15,000 ex-Confederate soldiers and widows on 
our pension list, and they received from the State of Geor¬ 
gia, during a period of twelve months, about enough to 
eke out an existence for two months. Atlanta opens her 
heart and her purse to the Confederate Soldiers who stood 
with Stonewall Jackson or fought with Robert E. Lee. 

How can you remedy these conditions ? Certainly not by 
diverting the income and the credit power of this State to 
unnecessary things. Certainly you cannot dp it by dividing 
a people. Certainly you cannot do it by creating business 
unrest. 

THE STATE’S CURRENT INDEBTEDNESS. 

The State of Georgia has borrowed and will borrow in the 
open market in the current year about $500,000.00. But 
that is not all. In order to pay the school teachers, it has 
borrowed $1,800,000.00, and must increase that sum to at 
least $2,200,000.00 before the year is out. The notes are 
coming due without the ability of the State to pay a single 
dollar on them except by re-borrowing. The method under 
which this has been done puts the burden of paying the 
interest on this State indebtedness on the school teachers, 
whose wages are so small that they cannot be properly 
spoken of as compensation for intellectual labor, and at¬ 
tract only the patriotic and the idealist. 


11 


NEED OF MORE HIGHWAYS. 

This State is losing year by year the money which Con¬ 
gress is ready to appropriate for it because it has no ade¬ 
quate road system. The multiplication of the automobiles, 
the need of quicker communication, the increasing sharp¬ 
ness in competition, make it absolutely necessary that this 
State turn its attention to the matter of bettering its roads. 
There should be a system of highways consisting of trunk 
and lateral roads reaching all parts of the State. Our 
forefathers foresaw the railroad situation, and met the 
needs of that day with a wisdom which will challenge the 
admiration of all times. Another hour strikes in Georgia, 
and it is for the highway system. 

We are first to impair Georgia's credit by saying that 
those provisions in her Constitution do not mean what they 
say as to the protection of her public debt. We are next to 
increase her public debt. We are next to divide her people. 
We are next to increase her taxes. To what end? To the 
end that the Capitol be moved from Atlanta to Macon, to 
the benefit of no one and to the injury of every one. 


GIRLS' SCHOOLS. 

There are girls' schools at Valdosta, Milledgeville and 
Athens. How essential those schools are to the welfare of 
this State! Much in need they are of dormitory room, in 
order that the daughters of this State, who are to be the 
mothers of the coming generation, should have a fair edu¬ 
cation; they do not demand a superlative training at the 
hands of this State; it is just a fair education that they 
may meet the increasing competition of the time and be 
prepared for the New World that is opening to them; and 
,you will either build them up or tear them down to the 
degradation of the State. 


12 


AGRICULTURAL SCHOOLS. 

There are eleven agricultural schools in this State. A 
twelfth one needs to be created. None of them are yet com¬ 
plete. None of them yet have money enough to do their 
work as well as they desire. And yet, this is an agricul¬ 
tural State, needing more the application of advanced agri¬ 
cultural science than ever before in its history, in order 
that it may meet the necessary diversification of crops; to 
meet the new world marketing conditions; to know how to 
preserve land, and to cultivate intensively; and still, scarcely 
one of those schools maintains any fair provision for the 
Education of women. 

How importunate must be the demands of those who re¬ 
quire the removal of the Capitol! The public schools must 
be impoverished; the State's faith must be impaired; the 
contract with the City of Atlanta must be declared to be 
one-sided; the gift permanent, but the Capitol not perma¬ 
nent; an enormous deficit in the State's revenue must go 
unheeded; the pensioners of the State provided for in a 
manner unworthy of a prosperous commonwealth; the school 
teachers must be paid at a niggardly wage; the girls’ schools 
must remain stunted for the lack of funds; the agricultural 
schools must be left without sufficient funds; the con¬ 
dition in the asylum must remain such that those who need 
attention can no longer be received even into crowded wards; 
they must be turned away. The criminal and the innocent 
insane must continue to be roomed together. All that Ma¬ 
con may have a Capitol sitting in its limits. 

MACON IS NOT THE CENTER OF THE STATE. 

What is the basis of Macon's claim? It is that Macon 
is the geographical center of the State. You must bear in 
mind that Macon sought this capital before the fight be¬ 
tween Milledgeville and Atlanta, and didn't get strength 


13 


enough to prosecute its demands. (1846-1847). Macon is 
located today just where she was in that contest and 
just where she was in 1877, when the Capitol was 
located in Atlanta. So its geographic position is no 
new element in the situation. Besides, the speed of trans¬ 
portation, the frequency of trains, the automobile, the tele¬ 
graph and the telephone have deprived this argument of 
the force it might have had in Oglethorpe's day. 

It is not the center of population of the State. There 
are nearly 250,000 more people in Georgia north of Macon 
than there are south of it. 

There are more than 300,000 more white people in Geor¬ 
gia north of Macon than south of it. 

If you move the line further north to Griffin, there are 
still over 115,000 more white people north of Griffin than 
south of it. 

The center of all population in Georgia is about one mile 
south of Forsyth, Georgia. 

The center of white population in Georgia is only about 
twelve miles south of Atlanta. 

The difference between the average distance from the 
county sites to Atlanta, as compared with this distance 
from Macon is too trifling to be taken into consideration. 

By the last census there were more than fourteen hun¬ 
dred thousand people north of Macon, and eleven hundred 
more South of it. 

There are 137,242 farms North of Macon, and 87,449 
south of it. 

The people north of Macon pay $1,903,131 of taxes; while 
those south of it pay only $1,393,236. 

There are 1,904,617 spindles north of Macon, and 129,500 
south of it. 


14 


There were 112 cotton mills north of Macon in 1910, and 
16 south of it. 

There were, in 1910, 158,143 registered votes north of 
Macon to 112,858 south of it. 

There are about 65 passenger trains in and out of At¬ 
lanta to about 37 in and out of Macon. 

There were nearly one hundred thousand more bales of 
cotton north of Macon than south of it in 1910. 

Yet, on the alleged claim that Macon is nearer the center 
of the State than is Atlanta, this entire fight is based. In 
no substantial sense is it true. Certainly it is not true in 
the sense that the Capital at Macon will be nearer the cen¬ 
ter of the white population in the State. 

Atlanta does not boastfully mention these things. Her 
heart is for all Georgia. Her population is largely made up 
of families from each county in the State. She helped 
Rome with all her might when she fought to get the loca¬ 
tion of the Armour plant. She wants to aid Columbus in 
every way she can to hold Fort Benning. She was proud 
of Augusta when she was made the location of a great mili¬ 
tary cantonment. She rejoiced with Macon when Camp 
Wheeler was located there, she did all she could to aid her 
in getting the Federal Land Bank. She wants Americus 
to have and to keep Souther Field, and to see it develop 
into a great training station and aerial depot. She rejoiced 
when Brunswick received substantial recognition at the 
hands of the Government, and wants to aid her in having 
the plant there located turned into some commercial en¬ 
deavor beneficial to herself and the State. 

She wants a new Agricultural College located in South 
Georgia where it will most benefit the State. Her heart, 
her purse, her power is at the command of any part of the 
State in its efforts to upbuild itself and to make Georgia 
greater. She wants Georgia to continue to be the Empire 


15 


State of the South, and she believes that Georgia must make 
united effort to advance during these changing times, and 
she knows that a divided Georgia will mean that the State 
will lose its commanding position in the councils of the 
Nation. 

A VOTE ON THIS BILL IS NOT A VOTE MERELY TO 
SUBMIT IT TO THE PEOPLE. 

We are met with the proposition repeated many times, 
and written thousands of times, that Macon's effort in this 
behalf is not to remove the Capitol, but to submit the ques¬ 
tion to the people. Therefore, it is asked that those who op¬ 
pose the proposition to remove shall, none-the-less, vote for 
this Constitutional amendment on the ground that it does 
not commit them to the thing intended to be finally accom¬ 
plished, to-wit: the removal of the Capitol, but that it only 
commits them to the proposition that the question is to 
be submitted to the people. I believe that this argument 
ought not to be submitted, because it offends common sense. 
Furthermore, it is a confession that it has not friends 
enough to carry it. 

The Constitution provides that any amendment to the 
Constitution “may be proposed in the Senate or House of 
Representatives, and, if the same shall be agreed to by two- 
thirds of the members elected to each of the two houses, 
such proposed amendment or amendments shall be entered 
on the Journal." It then provides that it be submitted to 
the people. 

I call attention to the fact that the Amendment may be 
“proposed" in either House; and, before it is submitted to 
the people, it is to be “agreed to". I will call your attention 
to the bill itself. The bill is called “a proposal to amend the 
Constitution". The first sentence contains these words: 
“That the following Article is proposed as an amendment to 
the Constitution." 


16 


When one makes a proposition to another, it declares the 
intent of the person making the proposition. It carries with 
Jt the recommendation of the person making the proposition. 
Suppose the Governor should propose to the Senate that it 
confirm a certain person whom he has nominated. Would 
the Senate not be justified in supposing that the Governor 
has decided that this was the right and proper thing to do? 
But the Constitution requires not only that it shall be “pro¬ 
posed”, but it relieves any doubt, and requires that it shall 
be “agreed to” by two-thirds. Can you propose something 
to another and agree to it, and still then say, “I am opposed 
to it, and I do not agree to it ?” 

Suppose, for instance, that a man votes to “propose” this 
amendment and to “agree to” it here on this floor, and goes 
back to his home and says to the people there, “I now pro¬ 
pose to you that you do not accept this bill”. The answer 
is, “You proposed it to us, and you agreed to it”. The man 
who puts himself in that position will find himself first 
cast aside by the men who led him into it. He will awake 
to find himself destroyed first in his own conscience, and 
then with his own people. 

The Constitution is a fundamental agreement which can 
be altered only according to its own terms; it is not a mere 
mechanism for a referendum. Yet this argument would 
reduce the Legislator to a mere automaton while in his 
inost important function. Surely there must be weakness 
indeed in the cause which stands on so slender a founda¬ 
tion. 


ATLANTA HAS PROVED HERSELF WORTHY. 

In 1880—the nearest census year to the election of 1877— 
Atlanta had a population of 37,000. This has grown to 
probably 200,000, multiplying itself nearly six times. 

The people who came to her borders, who invested in her 
lands, who embarked in business within her confines, and 


17 


cast their lots with hers, did so with the assurance that she 
was the permanent Capital of the State. 

It would be most unfair to say to those people that the 
City is founded upon an unstable basis; that its invest¬ 
ments, which have been made upon the faith that Atlanta 
was the permanent Capital of Georgia, have been reduced 
in value by the act of the State itself. 

Certainly the State has no reason to take back her talent 
on the ground that it has been buried, for besides multi¬ 
plying her population nearly six times, it has become the 
great Southern headquarters for insurance of all kinds; 

For live stock; 

For automobiles and accessories; 

For the fertilizer trade; 

The Southern center for railways, telegraphs, telephones 
and express; 

The central southern point for manufacturers’ agents; 

It is the medical center for an enormous territory; 

It is the headquarters of the Southern Region of the Rail¬ 
road Administration; 

It is the headquarters of the Military Establishment in 
the South; 

It possesses the largest and best equipped cotton ware¬ 
house in the Southern States; 

It is the financial center of the Southeast, and the home 
of the Federal Reserve Bank for this District. 

When Georgia sought to have the Federal Reserve Bank 
located in her borders, there was no other place which could 
compete with Birmingham, New Orleans, Memphis, Knox¬ 
ville, Chattanooga, and other cities out of the State. 


18 


Yet, after being adjudged the center of the financial 
South; after having brought to the State the great honor 
of having the Federal Reserve Bank located within her 
limits, the State itself is asked to declare her unworthy of 
retaining the Capitol. 

The very discussion does her grave injustice; it unsettles 
and unstabilizes her conditions before the world. The ad¬ 
judication sought would amount to holding that the Federal 
Government gave the State that which she did not deserve, 
when the Federal Reserve Bank was located here. 

If this fight succeeds, the next thing will be to take that 
Bank from the State of Georgia, for, when it leaves At¬ 
lanta, it will go to Birmingham or to New Orleans. 

The State cannot injure Atlanta without injuring her¬ 
self. 

The State cannot decry Atlanta without injuring herself. 

FULTON COUNTY HAS DONE HER PART BY THE 
STATE. 

The fight is aimed at Fulton County, as though she had 
been a great defaulter in the performance of her public 
duties. The record does not bear this out. In 1918 Fulton 
county paid to the State of Georgia $864,850.39, besides 
her taxes from public service corporations, and from the 
sale of auto tags; these most likely brought the sum up to 
an even million dollars or more. 

She drew from the Treasury $239,955.29. She paid to 
the State more than seven hundred and fifty thousand dol¬ 
lars more than she drew from the Treasury. 

She does not begrudge this contribution to the State's wel¬ 
fare. She is grateful that she is able to do it. But she 
does ask that her contribution to the State be not turned 
to her undoing. 


19 


This community deserves the reward which comes from 
duty well done, and will receive it when the facts are known. 

There seems to be no account taken of the fact that the 
State's greatest property—the Western & Atlantic Railroad 
—has its terminus here, and that its value is largely de¬ 
pendent upon the growth of this City; and that the City 
cannot be injured without injury to that Road. 

THE FEDERAL TAXES ALREADY MAKE A GREAT 
BURDEN. 

It is no time to incur unnecessary expenses to be paid by 
the public treasury, which in turn must levy upon the re¬ 
sources of the individual citizens. The United States Gov¬ 
ernment is now levying enormous burdens upon the peo¬ 
ple, which were wholly unknown to us until the recent war. 
It must continue to levy this burden for years to come, for 
we are now in a new era, and our obligations are world-wide. 

It is the utmost folly to burden with unnecessary taxes. 

BIBB COUNTY CAN MAKE BETTER USE OF HER PRO¬ 
POSED MILLION DOLLAR DONATION. 

If the one million dollars which Macon proposes having 
Bibb County contribute to this Capitol removal were made 
a fund to be invested in new enterprises and enlarging old 
ones, on the basis of the public’s taking twenty per cent of 
the stock subscriptions, and interested parties subscribing 
the other eighty per cent, this would increase Macon’s man¬ 
ufacturing capital five million dollars, and would give em¬ 
ployment to 5,000 more of skilled laborers, with estimated 
families of five each. This would increase the population 
of Macon 25,000, with an annual pay-roll of $1,000,000.00, 
and every dollar of the original one million would be well 
and securely invested at from six to eight per cent. 


20 


In undertaking to remove this Capitol, Macon is not using 
her own resources to the best purpose, and is injuring the 
resources of the State. 

OUR SUFFRAGE LAWS, AND A DIVIDED PEOPLE. 

The people of the State have, by Constitutional Amend¬ 
ment, undertaken to protect themselves against the regis¬ 
tration of undesirable voters. The power of the State in this 
respect is limited by the 15th Amendment to the Constitu¬ 
tion of the United States. The State has gone as far as it 
can in this behalf. The greatest wrong of Reconstruction 
times was the placing of the ballot in the hands of the freed- 
man. For fifty years this has hung like a pall over this 
State. If you call this election you undo the work of these 
years. 

An election on this Capitol question will first bring about 
crimination and recrimination that one side or the other 
is packing the registration lists with these undesirables. 
Then the lists will fill up with the undesirables, whether or 
not either side seeks them. And once they are on the 
list, they are there for all time. They will then become the 
deciding factor in all our elections, and the policy of the 
State will be shaped to meet the demands of its lowest citi¬ 
zens, and its laws will no longer reflect the average intelli¬ 
gence of the State. 

Thus, what was provided against in 1907 will be undone 
in this proposed unnecessary election; and we will have 
brought on the State the evils against which we then sought 
protection. 

That the people will be divided in ill will and bad feeling 
if this election is held, needs no proof further than the 
reading of the current Macon papers. There Atlanta is 
written of as an outcast; it is spoken of as though it were 
some far-off place, full of enemies of the State; our busi¬ 
nesses are threatened, as though in driving them out of 
Atlanta, they would yet stay in the State. 


21 


There would be no election for State House offices in 
which this issue did not become the deciding factor. The 
question would no longer be, “Is the candidate fit to be 
Governor, or Judge, or Commissioner ,, , etc., but, “Is he for 
or against the removal of the Capitol?” 

This would reach down to the County officers in the doubt¬ 
ful counties. It would rend the State into divided camps 
in this critical period of vital changes. 

This artificial and unnecessary issue would thwart the 
ambitions of many men who otherwise would succeed. Cer¬ 
tainly these results should be avoided by putting this ques¬ 
tion aside. 

THE PROPOSED ACT IS A NULLITY; IT DOES NOT 
SUBMIT TO THE PEOPLE OF GEORGIA THE 
QUESTION OF REMOVING THE CAPITOL; 

IF ADOPTED IT WILL BE INEFFECTIVE. 

This is not a bill to submit to the people of Georgia the 
question of the removal of the Capitol, my adversaries to 
the contrary notwithstanding. 

If this Legislature should agree to this proposed amend¬ 
ment,. it would not be such a proposal as the law contemp¬ 
lates. 

If the people voted for this proposed amendment, it would 
not accomplish the removal of the Capitol; something else 
must be done; 

The City of Macon must convey to the State Tattnall 
Square, “or other property in said City of Macon equally 
suitable for locating or building a Capitol”, and then, 

The County of Bibb must vote and deliver to the State 
One Million Dollars in bonds or money. 


22 


Suppose the people of Bibb County refused to vote the 
bonds; 

Suppose the City of Macon refused to convey the land. 

The result would be that the Capitol would not be re¬ 
moved. 

That necessarily leaves the question of the removal of the 
Capitol to less than all the registered voters of the State, 
for it is in fact left only to the voters of Bibb County; or, 
narrower yet, to the City Council of Macon; or still nar¬ 
rower, to the Mayor of Macon, who may veto the Ordinance 
of the City Council. 

The questions involved cannot be submitted to nor de¬ 
cided by so small a part of the State's electorate. It must 
be submitted to all the registered voters of the State. There 
is no power in the Legislature to make a conditional sub¬ 
mission of this proposed amendment. 

The Legislature can submit to the people only that which, 
when ratified by a majority of the qualified electors vot¬ 
ing thereon, “shall become a part of this Constitution". 

If this question is submitted to the people and ratified, 
the Capitol would not, by that act, be removed. The very 
submission is on condition that certain other things be done, 
and those things are to be done by persons other than the 
qualified electors. It is unthinkable that a Constitutional 
amendment can be left, in its final analysis, to some power 
other than the whole electorate. 

I have pointed out to you that the failure of Bibb County 
to vote the bonds or raise the money, would defeat the 
proposed amendment, and that the failure of Macon to 
convey Tattnall Square “or other property in said City of 
Macon equally suitable", would likewise defeat the removal 
of the Capitol. This act of the City of Macon depends on the 
following things: 


23 


(A) The vote of the governing power of Macon; 

(B) The vetoing or withholding of veto by the Mayor; 

(C) A determination by some unnamed power as to 
whether the alternate property “is equally suitable” for a 
Capitol building. 

Should Bibb County refuse to vote its bonds or raise the 
money; or should the governing body of Macon refuse to 
convey the land; or should the Mayor veto the Ordinance, 
the proposed amendment, even after it had been voted upon 
and ratified by the people, will fail. Should the City of Ma¬ 
con decide to give any other property than Tattnall Square, 
some unnamed Commission is to pass upon whether it is 
equally suitable. So there are four conditions, any one of 
which might defeat this proposed amendment, even after it 
had been ratified. In other words, the people are not the 
final residuum of the power over this amendment. If this 
proposed amendment is adopted it would not become a part 
of the Constitution. 

On the plain principles of law, this cannot be done, for 
in its last analysis, the entire matter is left to powers over 
which the electorate, as a whole, has no authority. 

I assert to you that this Legislature has no power to sub¬ 
mit such a conditional proposition to the people. The Con¬ 
stitution has provided another method for its amendment. 

This question is not novel. It has been passed upon in a 
case exactly similar. I refer to Livermore vs. Waite, 12 
L. R. A., 312, from the Supreme Court of California. 

In that case Sacramento was declared by the Constitu¬ 
tion of California to be the seat of Government of that 
State, to “so remain until changed by law; but no law chang¬ 
ing said seat of government shall be binding unless ap¬ 
proved and ratified by a majority of the qualified electors of 
the State voting therefor at a general state election, under 


24 


such regulations and provisions as the Legislature, by two- 
thirds vote of each House, may provide, submitting the 
question of change to the people.” 

Two-thirds of each House of the Legislature of Califor¬ 
nia voted for the following amendment: 

“The City of San Jose is hereby declared to be the 
seat of government of this State, and shall so remain 
until changed by law; but no law changing the seat of 
government shall be valid or binding unless the same 
be approved and ratified by a majority of the qualified 
electors of the state voting therefor at a general state 
election, under such regulations and provisions as the 
legislature, by a two-thirds vote of each house, may 
provide, submitting the question of change to the peo¬ 
ple; provided, that the state shall receive a donation 
of a site of not less than ten acres and one million dol¬ 
lars before such removal shall be had. The governor, 
the secretary of state, and the attorney-general are 
hereby authorized to approve said site, and upon the 
approval thereof, and the payment of one million dol¬ 
lars into the state treasury, the legislature shall pro¬ 
vide for the erection of the necessary building and the 
removal of the seat of government/’ 

You will note that this submission was conditional upon 
the donation of not less than ten acres of land, and one mil¬ 
lion dollars. And the land so provided was to be approved 
by a Commission. 

The proposal there was very much less conditional than 
is the proposal here. 

The Constitution of California provided, in practically 
the same words as ours, that, if the proposed amendment 
be ratified by the people, it “shall become a part of the 
Constitution”. The Court held that the proposed amend¬ 
ment would not become operative upon its approval by the 
people, because other conditions were to be performed be¬ 
fore it did become operative and that “The Legislature was 
not authoribed by the framers of the Constitution, nor do 


25 


the terms of that instrument permit it, to propose any 
amendment that will not, upon its adoption by the people, 
become an effective part of the Constitution; nor is it au¬ 
thorized to propose an amendment which, if ratified, will 
take effect only at the will of other persons, or upon the 
approval of such persons of some specified act or condition.” 

It, therefore, held this submission to be void; so is this 
bill void. 

When is Bibb County or Macon to do the things required 
to be done? If they are not done January 1, 1925, are they 
to do them at a subsequent date? If so, when? And, in 
the meantime, where is the Capitol. Suppose there was no 
sale for the Capitol building in Atlanta, or the Governor's 
Mansion; would the Capitol be removed, under this bill, not¬ 
withstanding the failure to make these sales ? Suppose the 
Governor's Mansion and the Capitol building could not be 
sold for enough money to build a new Capitol and Mansion 
in Macon, even with Bibb County's proposed million dollars; 
is the Capitol to be removed or not removed under this bill ? 

I submit to you that the whole proceeding before you is 
absolutely null and void, and,if you do what Macon is ask¬ 
ing you to do, you would have spoken beyond your juris¬ 
diction. 

These serious matters, vitally concerning the State's wel¬ 
fare, deserve more consideration than is exhibited by this 
bill. The matter is too serious to demand simply the pass¬ 
ing, idle thought of the men who deal with it. 

There are hundreds of vital needs of this State which are 
being shunted to one side, while some people make this 
issue in the thoughtless way in which it is here presented. 

It is time for this agitation to end, and for this State to 
become united. 

Atlanta wants no North Georgia; she wants no Middle 
Georgia; she wants no South Georgia; she wants a united 


26 


Georgia; she wants a Georgia which is, in truth, the Em¬ 
pire State of the South. 

Years ago it fell to the lot of Henry Grady to love this 
country back into union. How magnificent it is that the 
lot of loving this State back into union falls to Atlantal 
Chairman—Grady’s beloved son-in-law, Eugene R. Black. 

Respectfully submitted, 

ROBERT C. ALSTON. 











